The overwhelming majority of Marxists worldwide support AES, and a good number of Anarchists support AES against Capitalisy states. It’s not about “simping.”
Imo, support for AES authoritarian states is one of the main sources of friction between Marxists and Anarchists. It’s ideologically dishonest to suggest otherwise. Especially since most AES states are now capitalist in most respects. If you guys would drop the AES support then left unity might stand a chance.
If you guys would drop the AES support then left unity might stand a chance.
Ah, I see. So in order to achieve “left unity” all we have to do is:
Abandon support for every socialist project that was even moderately successful
Refuse to learn from their successes and failures because we have to write them off entirely as if they weren’t genuine movements
Allow blatant propaganda and falsehoods to be spread about them unchallenged, for fear of being associated with them.
Of course, if we did that, especially the last one, we’d be associated with them anyway - they called Obama a communist, they’ll apply the label to anyone. If every attempt at building socialism was an unmitigated failure that just made everything worse and resulted in things just as bad as the Nazis, then why the hell should anyone want to be a socialist? Why should we even be socialists?
And don’t try to pretend that it’s only uncritical support you’re talking about. If you have a good word to say about any of them, if you challenge accusations and call them out when they lack evidence, then you’ll be labelled a “tankie.” Y’all are obsessed with punching left and demonstrating your anticommunist credentials, and have been for the last 80 years, “If we just toss all the Reds out of the AFL/CIO, then people will see we’re not like them and they’ll be on our side, that we’re ‘one of the good ones,’” and then guess what, they call you Reds anyway, and when they come for you you’ll have alienated people who would’ve actually fought back. This is how we got to the point where even “liberal” became a dirty word, of being “too far left.”
Yeah, thanks but no thanks on that one. I’m going to continue critically supporting AES states and examining their success and failures and refuting misinformation about them - focusing on what’s actually true, rather than on trying to “prove” that I’m sufficiently anticommunist to pass some red scare purity test.
Marxists and Anarchists have a different view of what the state is, and what class is. Marxists see the state as an implementation of class oppression, Anarchists see it as a tool of hierarchy.
As a consequence, Marxists see Communism as a fully publicly owned and planned, democratic government, while Anarchists want decentralized networks of Communes. For Marxists, the Anarchist solution retains class distinctions as each commune only has internal ownership and thus class is retained, while for Anarchists the Marxist solution retains the state as it retains hierarchy.
This struggle over analysis drives the major distinctions between each major school of Leftist thought.
I don’t know if traitor is the right word. I see support for AES states as reprehensible because i don’t see any virtue in dictators running the world, even if their countries were once communist.
Marxists are aligned on support for AES, though, outside of fringe tendencies like Trotskyists and Gonzaloists. In my experience, it’s more of a hot topic among Anarchists, having spoken to firmly anti-AES Anarchists and critically supportive Anarchists.
Further, when you call AES states “Capitalist in most respects,” that just isn’t accurate from a Marxist stance on what Capitalism and Socialism are. AES states are where large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly controlled, while the private sector is dominated by small firms, sole proprietorships, and cooperatives of non-essential industries. This is because Marx viewed the only real way to achieve full public ownership is developing into it, rather than simply decreeing it.
The divide more tends to be among the stance on what the real obstacles in the way of progressing beyond Capitalism is, and those in support of AES tend to agree that that obstacle is currently the US Empire.
Their users are often overly entitled by this, spread hate, engage in brigading and censor people when they don’t agree with them.
It is mandatory to mention that while I said the above, there is probably a good portion of them who aren’t like that. They’re just the silent majority.
Some isolated users are very vocal when there’s a discussion about their instances. Happened in a discussion about defederation of hexbear in my instance. Wasn’t there but it lead to both instances being defederated from us
I’m not specifically saying you’re making a post and collectively jumping on a train to shit on us. It could also be that some users just search for political posts close to their beliefs or posts about their instance and only interact with those
It still feels Iike the only time you pop on threads, it goes wrong, and you are always seen in the same type of threads
If I don’t want to have a life, can someone explain this to me? What is hexbear, and what happened?
It’s a Left-unity instance for Marxists and Anarchists. That’s really it, some people get really mad at that.
Fixed it for ya.
The overwhelming majority of Marxists worldwide support AES, and a good number of Anarchists support AES against Capitalisy states. It’s not about “simping.”
Imo, support for AES authoritarian states is one of the main sources of friction between Marxists and Anarchists. It’s ideologically dishonest to suggest otherwise. Especially since most AES states are now capitalist in most respects. If you guys would drop the AES support then left unity might stand a chance.
Ah, I see. So in order to achieve “left unity” all we have to do is:
Abandon support for every socialist project that was even moderately successful
Refuse to learn from their successes and failures because we have to write them off entirely as if they weren’t genuine movements
Allow blatant propaganda and falsehoods to be spread about them unchallenged, for fear of being associated with them.
Of course, if we did that, especially the last one, we’d be associated with them anyway - they called Obama a communist, they’ll apply the label to anyone. If every attempt at building socialism was an unmitigated failure that just made everything worse and resulted in things just as bad as the Nazis, then why the hell should anyone want to be a socialist? Why should we even be socialists?
And don’t try to pretend that it’s only uncritical support you’re talking about. If you have a good word to say about any of them, if you challenge accusations and call them out when they lack evidence, then you’ll be labelled a “tankie.” Y’all are obsessed with punching left and demonstrating your anticommunist credentials, and have been for the last 80 years, “If we just toss all the Reds out of the AFL/CIO, then people will see we’re not like them and they’ll be on our side, that we’re ‘one of the good ones,’” and then guess what, they call you Reds anyway, and when they come for you you’ll have alienated people who would’ve actually fought back. This is how we got to the point where even “liberal” became a dirty word, of being “too far left.”
Yeah, thanks but no thanks on that one. I’m going to continue critically supporting AES states and examining their success and failures and refuting misinformation about them - focusing on what’s actually true, rather than on trying to “prove” that I’m sufficiently anticommunist to pass some red scare purity test.
I only have a surface level understanding of all this stuff, but don’t marxism and anarchism both aim for a stateless, classless society?
Marxists and Anarchists have a different view of what the state is, and what class is. Marxists see the state as an implementation of class oppression, Anarchists see it as a tool of hierarchy.
As a consequence, Marxists see Communism as a fully publicly owned and planned, democratic government, while Anarchists want decentralized networks of Communes. For Marxists, the Anarchist solution retains class distinctions as each commune only has internal ownership and thus class is retained, while for Anarchists the Marxist solution retains the state as it retains hierarchy.
This struggle over analysis drives the major distinctions between each major school of Leftist thought.
A good thread on this.
They do, but people like unruffled see marxists as traitors
I don’t know if traitor is the right word. I see support for AES states as reprehensible because i don’t see any virtue in dictators running the world, even if their countries were once communist.
Marxists are aligned on support for AES, though, outside of fringe tendencies like Trotskyists and Gonzaloists. In my experience, it’s more of a hot topic among Anarchists, having spoken to firmly anti-AES Anarchists and critically supportive Anarchists.
Further, when you call AES states “Capitalist in most respects,” that just isn’t accurate from a Marxist stance on what Capitalism and Socialism are. AES states are where large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly controlled, while the private sector is dominated by small firms, sole proprietorships, and cooperatives of non-essential industries. This is because Marx viewed the only real way to achieve full public ownership is developing into it, rather than simply decreeing it.
The divide more tends to be among the stance on what the real obstacles in the way of progressing beyond Capitalism is, and those in support of AES tend to agree that that obstacle is currently the US Empire.
Their users are often overly entitled by this, spread hate, engage in brigading and censor people when they don’t agree with them.
It is mandatory to mention that while I said the above, there is probably a good portion of them who aren’t like that. They’re just the silent majority.
How do you determine if something counts as “brigading” vs just being federated? Moreover, I have no idea what you’re counting as “spreading hate.”
https://jlai.lu/comment/13530572 (For your first question)
Some isolated users are very vocal when there’s a discussion about their instances. Happened in a discussion about defederation of hexbear in my instance. Wasn’t there but it lead to both instances being defederated from us
So it’s really just federation between instances, not dedicated and coordinated brigading.
For sure, the core of hexbear and lemmygrad isn’t brigading, but it happened enough so that people are fed up of it
Or, like I think, it’s just friction from opposing viewpoints and federation naturally cropping up.
It literally never happens. You just continue to not understand how federation works
I’m not specifically saying you’re making a post and collectively jumping on a train to shit on us. It could also be that some users just search for political posts close to their beliefs or posts about their instance and only interact with those
It still feels Iike the only time you pop on threads, it goes wrong, and you are always seen in the same type of threads
I am once again begging the Redditers to learn how federation works
I’m not going to start the whole thread again. Here is the reason we say this: https://jlai.lu/comment/13508125
(Sry I only have a link to my instance)
When you go out of your instance, it’s to argue about political opinions
Your not in your Instance… and you’re taking about politics!
Brigader! Mod! MOOOOODS! This person is Brigading!
I guess you didn’t read what I wrote
You can read my comment history. I’m sure you can check that I’m not only talking about politics and not always defending one side
Stop Brigading! You not on your own instance! That’s brigaaaadinggggg! MOOOOODS!
Ah yes, when you don’t have any arguments, use sarcasm and irony to make your opponent look like a fool. Classic.
Yeah, and the Nazi party was just a social event. 🙄
Google can probably help you if you really think it’s worth looking up.